Judging status in a PO world

the mad cyclist · Post by **the mad cyclist** » 20 Sep 2010, 13:49

With the notable exception of Powerswitch members, people judge and feel judged by the car they drive (this incidentally makes me, a smelly unwashed old heap).

What will mans favourite status symbol be in a PO world?

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 20 Sep 2010, 14:01

Well the obvious one will be whether he has a wind turbine and/or solar panels.

But it may be whether he can feed his family successfully.....

Or whether he has a couple of horses.

Or whether he has bicycles for his dependants.

Who knows - depends how far we descend down the slope I suppose.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 20 Sep 2010, 14:56

A car - the rich will be able to afford hybrid SUVs, the growing impoverished classes will have to do with car clubs/public transport and very old second hand cars...

PS_RalphW · Post by **PS_RalphW** » 20 Sep 2010, 15:23

My kids go to gym classes on Saturdays. They used to be in the local comprehensive - due for demolition under the Labour policy to upgrade school buildings. It had been left to rot and was falling apart.

Anyway, the new school survived the Coalition cuts and the old one has been bulldozed. The kids now go to the gym at the poshest private school in Cambridge. My chavmobile (Zafira) looks very out of place among the hybrid SUVs, our class is clearly there under sufferance. The cycle rack was discretely tucked away well out of sight, and by Cambridge standards little used. The main driveway to the school has no footpath. Clearly nobody is expected to walk. When my other half liberated some very tasty pears from a tree that were being left to rot, she was almost asked to leave.

Apart from spending a fortune on big buildings and gyms and stuff, why does it get dramatically better exam results? Rich kids are just as thick.

Blue Peter · Post by **Blue Peter** » 20 Sep 2010, 15:36

RalphW wrote:Apart from spending a fortune on big buildings and gyms and stuff, why does it get dramatically better exam results? Rich kids are just as thick.

There was a study a year or so ago, which showed that within a couple of years of starting school, rich thicker kids overtook poor, clever kids (on average). I can't remember whether causations were suggested, but I presume that it was mummy/daddy/the nanny was reading to the kid, taking an interest in their school work, etc.

I suppose a related issue, does anyone feel that (middle-class) parents' concern about the education of their off-spring has been increasing over time?

I can't remember it being an issue when I was growing up. There was obvious interest/concern, but there wasn't an almost desparation about things. No one was pushing for homework for primary school kids, or enrolling them in extra maths and English classes (a quite common phenomenon round here now).

I assume that it is a conscious or sub-conscious middle class fear that the water level is rising and its getting harder and harder for children to keep their heads above the surface,

Peter.

Keela · Post by **Keela** » 20 Sep 2010, 15:50

Totally agree Blue Peter.

I've just finished teaching a group of teenagers - they are in their second year of a BTEC National Diploma. They are hoping to apply to Uni for next year and they are very despondant about their chances of gaining either Uni places or useful employment down the line.

It is very tough now. These are good ordinary kids who would shape up well given enough opportunity. However the competition is now so high that they worry that they will not get the chance to prove themselves.

Education is measurable and so is a means of choosing "the best" in such a way that the Uni (or employer) can avoid accusations of a bias (as would be the case if they were judged on interviews or other subjective tests).

Qualifications are key in the rat race of today.

Ludwig · Post by **Ludwig** » 20 Sep 2010, 16:30

Lord Beria3 wrote:A car - the rich will be able to afford hybrid SUVs, the growing impoverished classes will have to do with car clubs/public transport and very old second hand cars...

The problem won't be affording cars, it will be affording petrol.

Ludwig · Post by **Ludwig** » 20 Sep 2010, 16:45

Blue Peter wrote:
RalphW wrote:Apart from spending a fortune on big buildings and gyms and stuff, why does it get dramatically better exam results? Rich kids are just as thick.
There was a study a year or so ago, which showed that within a couple of years of starting school, rich thicker kids overtook poor, clever kids (on average). I can't remember whether causations were suggested, but I presume that it was mummy/daddy/the nanny was reading to the kid, taking an interest in their school work, etc.

I suppose a related issue, does anyone feel that (middle-class) parents' concern about the education of their off-spring has been increasing over time?

I can't remember it being an issue when I was growing up. There was obvious interest/concern, but there wasn't an almost desparation about things. No one was pushing for homework for primary school kids, or enrolling them in extra maths and English classes (a quite common phenomenon round here now).

I assume that it is a conscious or sub-conscious middle class fear that the water level is rising and its getting harder and harder for children to keep their heads above the surface,

Peter.

I think there are several strands to this development. It's partly that we are a more individualistic society than we used to be - education is no longer seen as a national asset, but as a service.

Also, with the decline of industry, education is more important for more people than it used to be. Without a degree, nowadays, you face a life working in shops or in call centres. Of course, the old jobs in industry were often very tough, but that fact was offset by the existence of strong working communities, and a sense of vocational pride. Now, there is much more pressure to get an office job with proper promotion prospects.

Yet another reason for the obsession with pushing children is the erosion of educational standards. Over the past quarter-century, exams have got easier and easier thanks to (a) the Government's desire to "show" that education is improving and (b) the ubiquity of league tables, resulting in exam boards competing to create the easiest exams. Therefore, schools no longer challenge the cleverest children - witness the repeated complaints of the CBI that school leavers and indeed many graduates lack basic numeracy and literacy skills needed in the workplace. Where schools are failing children, ambitious parents see it as their job to make up the difference.

Regarding less clever kids getting good grades - the advantages of a private education can't be overstated. When I was in the 6th form, a former classmate left to attend a private school. He ended up getting 4 grade A "A" levels at a time where this was a real achievement, even though he'd never been one of the real high flyers at my school.

contadino · Post by **contadino** » 20 Sep 2010, 17:19

Around here, your worth as a man is already measured on the quality of your olive oil, the state of your vegetable plot, and how good your wine is.

A few years ago I went and asked an old neighbour how to harvest olives from a garden of a holiday home owner, where the trees had not been maintained properly. He said that the owner wasn't a proper man as without oil, his family wouldn't be able to feed themselves.

It may sound backwards to you middle englanders, but it makes perfect sense to me.

jonny2mad · Post by **jonny2mad** » 20 Sep 2010, 17:31

future status symbols

Small arms, artillery, night vision equipment, explosives and mines, stockpiles of ammunition actually that may be a bit old fashioned it could well be higher tech weaponry .

Also being part of or leading a warlord army or militia, as jay hanson says the best way to prepare for peak oil is marry into a large family so they can help defend you .

Having lots of dangerous well armed loyal children or relatives you could add to that having strong in group out group boundary's

Think Afghanistan status is being in the right clan having heavy weapons controlling territory

Then you do things like open Koran schools to show how strong you are and that your cultured, but basically power comes from the barrel of a gun

RenewableCandy · Post by **RenewableCandy** » 20 Sep 2010, 17:41

For women, the best status symbol is, not having to have sex (of course this is not the same as, not having any

).

It's that simple, and it's universal.

snow hope · Post by **snow hope** » 20 Sep 2010, 18:38

Aren't you women lucky that its as simple as that!

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 21 Sep 2010, 00:53

RalphW wrote:Apart from spending a fortune on big buildings and gyms and stuff, why does it get dramatically better exam results? Rich kids are just as thick.

A lot of it is the expectation of the parents and the encouragement they give their children. This effects their attention and application in school and the results they achieve. It's why inner city schools are lower achieving than suburban ones. The expectation of the parents also rubs off on the teachers. If the parents and the kids don't give a damn, why should the teachers? It is also about the Head Teacher.

There was a program on the box tonight about high paid public employees, one of whom is Paul Dick, the head of two schools in West Berkshire. The Kennet school, his first in the area, was low achieving until he was bought in. It is now one of the highest achieving schools in the country. It has the same demographic as before but the expectation of what the pupils can achieve was changed.

He is a very good Head Teacher and a leader, and I don't think many people locally object to what he is paid, but he has high expectations of the children and this rubs off on the teachers and parents and is passed on to the children, who react to that expectation in a positive way. He's vastly improved his second school as well.

In contrast my children's old school has gone the other way with a change of head. The old one was a second hand car dealer sort of person, if you see what I mean, and I'm not sure that he knew much about anything; never got the chance to ask him anything much. But he knew all the children by name, was a strict disciplinarian, and had high expectations which were achieved. The new one is very good academically and as a manager but doesn't know the children and doesn't inspire, so the results are going down. Again, no change to the demographic.

biffvernon · Post by **biffvernon** » 21 Sep 2010, 07:52

kenneal wrote: This effects their attention and application in school and the results they achieve.

Had Ken's parents been rich he would have learnt the correct usage of 'effects' and 'affects'.

Post by **kenneal - lagger** » 21 Sep 2010, 08:42

biffvernon wrote:
kenneal wrote: This effects their attention and application in school and the results they achieve.
Had Ken's parents been rich he would have learnt the correct usage of 'effects' and 'affects'.

I obviously wasn't paying attention when we went through that one or was in a science class. Although my parents were anything but rich, I went to grammar school, as did many children of poor parents, and it gave us a good start in life.

Unfortunately, blind socialism couldn't see this and most grammar schools were turned into awful comprehensives and all and sundry were subjected to an academic education. And we now wonder why we have so many disaffected young adults and a great shortage of skilled builders and engineering workers.